Discussion in 'Trials' started by molly67, May 18, 2018.
His own statements put him in the frame as party to murder
His mother has heard all this before in the station and so the courtroom is her second time to hear his story. I wonder how much of this is new to Ana's parents.
This article, I am assuming is Boy B as it is the same solicitor cited, so the mother had already been in the station, sat through the interviews, seen the photos and knew the gravity of the situation -
"The teen, dressed in a pink sweater and blue jeans, came into court with his mother who led him by the hand. He sat beside her and she clasped one of his hands in hers and caressed his face during the hearing in the Children’s Court." ...
"The teenager thanked the judge before leaving the courtroom holding hands with his mother."
Second boy charged over Ana Kriegel murder sent forward for trial
I sure wish AK's mom could be holding her hands, caressing her face. However, we know that a poor, murdered, girl, is no longer here to do all of her growing up. She will always be fourteen (14) for her family, friends, and those that came to care for her.
I understand the need to show the boys 'humanity', but we need to remember that these boys killed another human being. They went into the darkness, and fell into the evil. They dehumanized this young girl, like bullies in a schoolyard. The way he talked about her dress. The clothes she chose to feel comfortable in. The words he used to describe AK were horrid, IMHO.
So yes, try to garner sympathy for these boys. But my heart is with AK's family. And perhaps that's not what the (defense) team is playing at emotions with. It just felt that way to me. Peace & Love to all
Unfortunately group attacks are often far more savage than single attacker.
I am confused as to whether there are two murder weapons?
She was clearly hit with the stick - a weapon that was bought to the murder (shows premeditation)
But what is with the concrete block?
It is now clear why Boy B is on trial for murder as a party to a group attack. Hard to take seriously his claim that he ran away before hand.
I totally agree. As you say what Boy B is described as wearing is in sharp contrast to how Boy B describes Ana's "slutty" attire.I have to admit that dressing a then thirteen year old boy in pink, "clasping his hand" and "caressing his face" seems a cynical attempt at stage managing our perceptions.
He had previously appeared in court [so the above was not his first time in a court room] "The teen, dressed in a cream hoodie top and black jeans, sat between his parents during the in camera hearing." I am presuming it is Boy B given it is the same solicitor "He was accompanied to court by his barrister Damien Colgan SC (with solicitor David Powderly) who pleaded for bail." Second boy (13) charged with murder of Ana Kriegel granted bail - Independent.ie
I don't think Boy B personally would have chosen a pink jumper to wear and the journalist could not have written about the tender gestures had the mother not executed them. Reading the article just jars with me personally as I feel a deliberate attempt to manipulate but orchestrated by whom I don't know.
It’s a horrible thought, but with concrete being so porous, I’m wondering if blood ran into a pool around it and was absorbed on all sides, but forensics could tell by the ground underneath that it hadn’t actually been picked up. The hair on it - ended up there due to violence of the attack. God it’s just so horrible. Mum of 2 boys and niece Ana’s age. Struggling with this one
So boy B has placed himself at the crime scene.
In an interview with gardaí on 25 May last year, which was shown to the jury today, Boy B said he saw Boy A “flip” Ana and start to attack her on the evening of 14 May 2018.
He said Ana started to plead with Boy A to stop. Boy B said that his co-accused at that point began removing her clothes.
In interviews conducted with gardaí at Finglas Garda Station, Detective Garda Donal Daly told Boy B that he was looking for the truth and nothing else.
In an earlier part of the interview, Boy B told officers that he entered the abandoned house as Boy A and Ana were talking outside. While there, he said he picked up a white plank and put it down again. He said he walked outside and then Ana and Boy A started walking in. He said he “tailed them” and then Boy A turned to him and said “Thanks. We’ll be fine. You can go now.”
However, as he was pressed further, Boy B told officers that he could see Ana being attacked.
Boy B told gardaí: “At first, I walked around but then I went back to the carpet area and I saw him flip her and start to choke her. When I saw that, I instantly knew what was happening and I was just shook. I didn’t know what to do.
“She was starting to cry a bit, she kept, like, saying ‘no, no don’t do this’ then Boy A started taking off her clothes but I left before he got to take off the bra.”
He later added: “So as Boy A was taking off her clothes – he looked at the door where I was standing and I sprinted away.”
Earlier in the interview, Boy B told officers that he saw Boy A put his arm around her and then “he kind of hugged her I guess. He put his arm around her and I don’t know what was happening.”
He said: “It was weird when I saw him do that. I thought something was about to happen so I left.”
Boy B told gardaí he saw Boy A choking Ana Kriegel and removing her clothes in abandoned house, court hears
In the below account, Boy B says he gave up talking to Boy A afterwards.
Garda Donal Daly was dogged in his questioning of Boy B - from Boy B saying he saw Ana later looking sad after meeting Boy A, then admitting to hearing her screams but that Boy A would protect her, to finally getting Boy B to admit that he was there when Boy A started attacking Ana.
Just establishing when exactly he left is now to be determined and how complicit he actually was.
Ana Kriegel trial: Boy told gardaí he saw co-accused 'flip' schoolgirl and 'start to choke her' - Independent.ie
Wow it's really coming out now and very evident why he's charged with voyeurism. The more he was pushed the more he revealed, so chances are he's still not telling the whole truth. Also very hard to believe that he heard Ana screaming and he ran away - if he's as innocent as he claims he would have tried to help her.
There will definitely be more revelations imo. Note he mentioned picking up the stick and putting it down. Probably to explain away his finger prints or his DNA on it.
Apart from the ages being different this case reminds me of the James Bulger murder. I hope these two get a more severe sentence than James's killers.
At the moment, I think Boy B could well be the more devious of the two. Instead of introducing the final interview, each interview is being presented to the jury in great detail. The prosecution has been building a case of Boy B changing his story every time he is confronted with facts. It went from "I have no clue what happened to her." [sic] in his initial statement to where it currently stands at Boy B running away while Boy A is in the middle of choking and sexually assaulting Ana. He didn't try to stop Boy A or pull him off, go for help or ring the guards. The guards called Boy B's house less than five hours after Ana was murdered and he lied to them. It was only the next morning that he mentioned Boy A. That afternoon he again lied to the guards about the route they took in the park. He admitted that he heard Ana's screams but all he did was to "give up speaking to Boy A".
He admits he gave the tape to Boy A which might have his DNA on it and, as noted above, he picked up a plank and put it down again. Was that to help Boy A knock out/murder Ana but became unnecessary as Boy A had already succeeded? Given that Ana struggled so hard and inflicted so many bruises on Boy A it begs the question , how did he manage to choke her, rip her clothes off, tape her and defend himself all at the same time and all by himself? Think there will be a lot more to come out on Monday when the jury hears Boy B's interview when he was again arrested on the 7th July.
I don't know what to think, so much new info, it's pretty cut and dry the 2 lads are not the "alleged" culprits any longer.... is that wrong to deduce? I'm starting to think Boy B is the brains behind the operation.
Are we also going to see the interviews with Boy A dissected in the same way? Anyone know how long more the trial is going to last? I feel like we've only just started getting into the real evidence
Not sure. It was estimated to be 2 weeks long and we've had 4 weeks so far.
It seems the only real options for the accused are to run a cut throat defence. Boy B seems to have some latitude to claim a lesser role in the murder. The forensics largely incriminate Boy A as the one who delivered the fatal blows.
However IIRC - from dimly remembered crimes lectures, there are limits to this sort of cut throat defence
AFAIK, the state is not required to prove the precise role of each boy in a genuine joint venture murder. Otherwise it is too easy for each offender to say it was the other one that did it.
Boy B seems to be a clear party to the murder as things stand. I guess his best chance is to claim he intended to be involved in a lesser offence and then Boy A got out of control. Boy B runs off before that happened.
Whether the Court will believe such a defence is the question.
I read that anything Boy B said cannot be used in evidence... so where does that leave the jury?
Ana Kriégel trial: Boy B interviews may not be used against Boy A, jury told
Boy B's confessions can be used against himself - but cannot be used against Boy A, because they are not sworn testimony where counsel can X
But the Jury doesn't need Boy B's pretrial statements against Boy A - they have the forensics
Boy B really was rather stupid to make any of these statements to police of course. It will end up being the main evidence against him